MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283075678 · doi:10.1111/add.15975

Mortality in the SuperMIX cohort of people who inject drugs in Melbourne, Australia: a prospective observational study

2022· article· en· W4283075678 on OpenAlexaff
Penny Hill, Mark Stoové, Paul A. Agius, Lisa Maher, Matthew Hickman, Sione Crawford, Paul Dietze

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual Risk
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Infection and Immunity
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilMonash UniversityNational Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research UnitNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchGilead SciencesBurnet InstituteBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineNational Death IndexHazard ratioProspective cohort studyConfidence intervalCohort studyMortality rateObservational studyDemographyCohortProportional hazards modelInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To measure mortality rates and factors associated with mortality risk among participants in the SuperMIX study, a prospective cohort study of people who inject drugs. DESIGN: A prospective observational study using self-reported behavioural and linked mortality data. SETTING: Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS/CASES: A total of 1209 people who inject drugs (67% male) followed-up between 2008 and 2019 for 6913 person-years (PY). MEASUREMENTS: We linked participant identifiers from SuperMIX to the Australian National Death Index and estimated all-cause and drug-related mortality rates and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs). We used Cox regression to examine associations between mortality and fixed and time-varying socio-demographic, alcohol and other drug use and health service-related exposures. FINDINGS: Between 2008 and 2019 there were 76 deaths in the SuperMIX cohort. Of those with a known cause of death (n = 68), 35 (51%) were drug-related, yielding an all-cause mortality rate of 1.1 per 100 PY [95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.88-1.37] with an estimated SMR of 16.64 (95% CI = 13.29-20.83) and overall accidental drug-induced mortality rate of 0.5 per 100 PY (95% CI = 0.36-0.71). Reports of recent use of ambulance services [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 3.77, 95% CI =1.78-7.97] and four or more incarcerations (aHR = 2.78, 95% CI = 1.55-4.99) were associated with increased mortality risk. CONCLUSIONS: In Melbourne, Australia, mortality among people who inject drugs appears to be positively associated with recent ambulance attendance and experience of incarceration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAddictionSame topicHIV, Drug Use, Sexual RiskFrench-language works237,207